A sample of an annotated bibliography entry for HCM402, using the .docx

A sample of an annotated bibliography entry for HCM402, using
the guidelines on page 11, and addressing at least one bullet per
section
Peter Pronovost, M.D., Ph.D., Dale Needham, M.D., Ph.D.,
Sean Berenholtz, M.D., David Sinopoli, M.P.H., M.B.A., Haitao
Chu, M.D., Ph.D., Sara Cosgrove, M.D., Bryan Sexton, Ph.D.,
Robert Hyzy, M.D., Robert Welsh, M.D., Gary Roth, M.D.,
Joseph Bander, M.D., John Kepros, M.D., and Christine
Goeschel, R.N., M.P.A. An Intervention to Decrease Catheter-
Related Bloodstream Infections in the ICU N Engl J Med
2006;355:2725-32.
This study is closely related to the previous literature, which is
cited. The review of earlier work is recent and complete as of
the time this article was written.
The problem statement is clear: Can catheter-related
bloodstream infections occurring in the intensive care unit
(ICU) be reduced using training protocols and checklists?
The hypothesis is clearly stated: catheter-related bloodstream
infections occurring in the intensive care unit (ICU) will be
reduced using training protocols and checklists.
Method: independent and dependent variables are clearly
stated, and are, respectively, the intervention of training
protocols/checklists, and the rates of catheter related
bloodstream infections.
The sample was 108 hospital ICUs in Michigan that agreed to
participate in the study, and of these, 103 reported data. The
analysis included 1981 ICU-months of data and 375,757
catheter-days. This sample should be representative of hospitals
in other states in the United States
Results and Discussion are related to the hypotheses. The
median

rate of catheter-related bloodstream infection per 1000 catheter-
days decreased
from 2.7 infections at baseline to 0 at 3 months after
implementation of the study
intervention (P≤0.002), and the mean rate per 1000 catheter-
days decreased from
7.7 at baseline to 1.4 at 16 to 18 months of follow-up
(P<0.002). The regression model
showed a significant decrease in infection rates from baseline,
with incidence-rate
ratios continuously decreasing from 0.62 (95% confidence
interval [CI], 0.47 to 0.81)
at 0 to 3 months after implementation of the intervention to 0.34
(95% CI, 0.23 to
0.50) at 16 to 18 months.
The list of references was current at the time the article was
written.
The report is clearly written and understandable.
Running head: ACUTE MYELOID LEUKEMIA: A CONCISE
REVIEW 1
ACUTE MYELOID LEUKEMIA: A CONCISE REVIEW 8Acute
Myeloid Leukemia
Ruth Ivy
HCM 402
July 14, 2019
Acute Myeloid Leukemia
The body is made up of million cells that undergo cell cycle
that allows them to grow then they divide and die. For you to be
able to understand the concept around this, you will need to
know about cancer whereby cells grow uncontrollably. In that

case, cells grow but they do not die like other normal cells. This
occurs by first damaging the DNA of the cells. Leukemia starts
in the organs that make up the blood, called the bone marrow.
Acute cancer will need to be treated before they are fatal.
Acute myeloid leukemia is a type of cancer that starts in the
blood cells inside the bone marrow. The blood stem cells that
are in the bone marrow produces new blood cells. In the
production, cells will develop and make the blood-forming cells
which develop to red blood cells. Lymphocytes are made from
the lymphoblast; these are the ones that are supposed to die
which do not happen when leukemia is involved. In the case of
leukemia, the lymphocytes do not die but reproduce and crowd
in the bone marrow.
The high number of lymphocytes makes the organ to be unable
to function normally. The blood vessel will become clogged and
the movement of blood will be hindered. The symptoms will
start showing from that point whereby one will have bone and
joint pain as cells build up there. The cancerous cells when in
the spleen and liver they will lead to abdominal swelling. When
some risk factors are prevented, they can help to mitigate
myeloid leukemia. The risk factors such as smoking, chemical
exposure and other many can cause leukemia. Some risk cannot
be controlled as one is born with.
There is also a diagnosis process that needs to be
understood when we look at the symptoms of the disorder. Once
you get diagnosed with the disorder, then you can be tested to
determine leukemia. The blood sample is the ones that are taken
to take the patient through testing. On the other hand, the
sample of bone marrow biopsy can also be taking and
aspiration. According to the American cancer society, the bone
marrow is supposed to have 20% blast for it to be diagnosed.
The shortage of red blood cells and the platelets indicates the
presence of leukemia. When you are doing the cells, the
cytochemistry is applied where cells are dyed with a stain. The
leukemia cells react with the stains.
There are treatments of AML which are based on the patient.

The main treatment is chemotherapy. You can be injected with
anti-cancer pills and the doctor may insert a catheter into the
vein. This is when the patient is under anesthesia. These
approaches relieve the pain and chemotherapy can start. There
are stages that are involved, remission induction and followed
by consolidation. The drugs that are used have many side
effects since they invade the dividing cells very rapidly. These
affect the hair roots and that is why patients have a loss of hair.
The patients always have to be on a good diet since you will be
on constant medication and pills. To make sure you are strong
food is very important. However, despite all the treatments and
the countermeasure taken, many people succumb to leukemia.
most of the death from AML are adult. The doctors are hoping
to do a lot so that they can be in a position to help people.
When someone is diagnosed, you will have to go through some
hard and painful life. When the treatments are done then the
patient can live a normal life thereafter. There is nothing that
the doctors can do in preventing the gene since you are born
with them.
We can conclude that AML is very complex and the knowledge
in biology can help us to discover new potential drugs that can
help us to deal with the disorder. It is a fact that you cannot win
through a single approach to the drug option. Relapse can be
termed to be the highest cause of the cases of mortality after
HCT. On the other hand, immunotherapy is the other approach
that helps to provide a long-lasting cure for AML patients.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/323444.php
https://ascopubs.org/doi/full/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.0333
https://journals.lww.com/co-

hematology/Abstract/2007/03000/Influence_of_new_molecular_
prognostic_markers_in.5.aspx
Influence of new molecular prognostic markers in patients with
karyotypically normal acute myeloid leukemia: recent advances
Mrózek, Krzysztofa; Döhner, Hartmutb; Bloomfield, Clara Da
Current Opinion in Hematology: March 2007 - Volume 14 -
Issue 2 - p 106–114
doi: 10.1097/MOH.0b013e32801684c7
Myeloid disease
Purpose of review Molecular study of cytogenetically normal
acute myeloid leukemia is among the most active areas of
leukemia research. Despite having the same normal karyotype,
adults with de-novo cytogenetically normal acute myeloid
leukemia who constitute the largest cytogenetic group of acute
myeloid leukemia, are very diverse with respect to acquired
gene mutations and gene expression changes. These genetic
alterations affect clinical outcome and may assist in selection of
proper treatment. Herein we critically summarize recent
clinically relevant molecular genetic studies of cytogenetically
normal acute myeloid leukemia.
Recent findings NPM1 gene mutations causing aberrant
cytoplasmic localization of nucleophosmin have been
demonstrated to be the most frequent submicroscopic alterations
in cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia and to confer
improved prognosis, especially in patients without a
concomitant FLT3 gene internal tandem duplication.
Overexpressed BAALC, ERG and MN1 genes and expression of
breast cancer resistance protein have been shown to confer poor
prognosis. A gene-expression signature previously suggested to
separate cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia patients
into prognostic subgroups has been validated on a different
microarray platform, although gene-expression signature-based
classifiers predicting outcome for individual patients with
greater accuracy are still needed.

Summary The discovery of new prognostic markers has
increased our understanding of leukemogenesis and may lead to
improved prognostication and generation of novel risk-adapted
therapies.
http://www.bloodjournal.org/content/127/1/53?sso-checked=true
An update of current treatments for adult acute myeloid
leukemia
Hervé Dombret and Claude Gardin
Abstract
Recent advances in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) biology and
its genetic landscape should ultimately lead to more subset-
specific AML therapies, ideally tailored to each patient's
disease. Although a growing number of distinct AML subsets
have been increasingly characterized, patient management has
remained disappointingly uniform. If one excludes acute
promyelocytic leukemia, current AML management still relies
largely on intensive chemotherapy and allogeneic hematopoietic
stem cell transplantation (HSCT), at least in younger patients
who can tolerate such intensive treatments. Nevertheless,
progress has been made, notably in terms of standard drug dose
intensification and safer allogeneic HSCT procedures, allowing
a larger proportion of patients to achieve durable remission. In
addition, improved identification of patients at relatively low
risk of relapse should limit their undue exposure to the risks of
HSCT in first remission. The role of new effective agents, such
as purine analogs or gemtuzumab ozogamicin, is still under
investigation, whereas promising new targeted agents are under
clinical development. In contrast, minimal advances have been
made for patients unable to tolerate intensive treatment, mostly
representing older patients. The availability of hypomethylating
agents likely represents an encouraging first step for this latter
population, and it is hoped will allow for more efficient
combinations with novel agents.

J Clin Med. 2016 Mar; 5(3): 33.
Published online 2016 Mar 5. doi: 10.3390/jcm5030033
PMCID: PMC4810104
PMID: 26959069
Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A Concise Review
Jennifer N. Saultz1 and Ramiro Garzon2,*
Jennifer N. Saultz
1Medical Oncology/Hematology, Department of Internal
Medicine, Starling-Loving Hall, Room M365, 320 W. 10th
Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA; [email protected]
Find articles by Jennifer N. Saultz
Ramiro Garzon
2Division of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, 460
W 12th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
Find articles by Ramiro Garzon
Jeffrey E. Rubnitz, Academic Editor
Author informationArticle notesCopyright and License
informationDisclaimer
1Medical Oncology/Hematology, Department of Internal
Medicine, Starling-Loving Hall, Room M365, 320 W. 10th
Ave., Columbus, OH 43210, USA; [email protected]
2Division of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, 460
W 12th Ave, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
*Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-614-247-2518
Received 2015 Dec 11; Accepted 2016 Feb 29.
Copyright © 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel,
Switzerland.
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms
and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution (CC-

BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
Go to:
Abstract
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous clonal
disorder characterized by immature myeloid cell proliferation
and bone marrow failure. Cytogenetics and mutation testing
remain a critical prognostic tool for post induction treatment.
Despite rapid advances in the field including new drug targets
and increased understanding of the biology, AML treatment
remains unchanged for the past three decades with the majority
of patients eventually relapsing and dying of the disease.
Allogenic transplant remains the best chance for cure for
patients with intermediate or high risk disease. In this review,
we discuss the landmark genetic studies that have improved
outcome prediction and novel therapies.
Keywords: AML, leukemia, review
Go to:
1. Introduction
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous disorder
characterized by clonal expansion of myeloid progenitors
(blasts) in the bone marrow and peripheral blood. Previously
incurable, AML is now cured in approximately 35%–40% of
patients younger than age 60 years old [1]. For those >60 years
old, the prognosis is improving but remains grim. Recent
studies have revealed that the disorder arises from a series of
recurrent hematopoietic stem cell genetic alterations
accumulated with age. Using deep sequencing techniques on
primary and relapsed tumors, a phenomenon called clonal
evolution has been characterized with both founding clones and
novel subclones, impacting the therapeutic approach [2].
Despite an increased understanding of AML biology, our efforts
to this point in changing treatment strategy have been
disappointing. In this review, we discuss the current diagnostic
and prognostic strategies, current treatment approaches and
novel therapies critical to AML management.

Go to:
2. Morphology
Morphologically, AML blasts vary in size from slightly larger
than lymphocytes to the size of monocytes or larger. The nuclei
are large in size, varied in shape and usually contain several
nucleoli. AML blasts express antigens found also on healthy
immature myeloid cells, including common differentiation (CD)
markers CD13, CD33 and CD34 [3]. Other cells markers are
expressed depending on the morphological subtype of AML and
stage of differentiation block such as monocytic differentiation
markers (CD4, CD14, CD11b), erythroid (CD36, CD71) and
megakaryocytes markers (CD41a and CD61). On occasion, AML
blasts also co-express antigens restricted to T or B cell lineages
including Terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase (TdT), Human
leukocyte antigen-antigen D related (HLA-DR), CD7 and CD19.
Rarely, the blasts can exhibit morphologic and immune-
phenotypic features of both myeloid and lymphoid cells that
make it difficult to classify them as either myeloid or lymphoid
in origin. These cases are classified as mixed phenotypic
leukemia and usually portend a worse overall survival [4]. Bone
marrow aspirate and biopsy, including morphology, immune-
phenotype, cytochemistry and genetics studies (conventional
karyotype and molecular studies) remain essential for diagnosis,
classification and risk stratification.
Go to:
3. Classification
Over the years there have been several different classification
systems for AML based on etiology, morphology, immune-
phenotype and genetics. In the 1970s, AML was classified
according to the French-American-British classification system
using mainly morphology and immune-phenotype/cytochemical
criteria to define eight major AML subtypes (FAB M0 to M7)
[5]. The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of
AML, replaced the old French-American-British classification
system to become the essential modality for AML classification
today. The WHO classification was updated in 2008 and

identifies seven AML subtypes: (1) AML with recurrent genetic
abnormalities (RUNX1-RUNX1T1 t(8;21)(q22;q22), CBFB-
MYH11 Inv(16)(p13.1q22), t(16;16)(p13.1;q22), PML-RARA
t(15,17)(q22;q12), MLL 11q23 abnormalities, etc.) and with
gene mutations (Nucleophosmin 1 (NPM1) and CEBPA mutated
gene); (2) AML with myelodysplasia-related changes; (3)
Therapy related myeloid neoplasms; (4) AML not otherwise
specified (NOS) (similar to FAB Classification M0–M7 with
others such as acute megakaryoblastic leukemia, acute
panmyelosis with myelofibrosis, and pure erythroleukemia); (5)
Myeloid sarcoma; (6) Myeloid proliferations related to Down
syndrome; and (7) Blastic plasmocytoid dendritic cell neoplasm
[6]. Based on etiology alone, AML can also be subdivided into
three distinct categories: (1) Secondary AML (s-AML)
(associated with antecedent myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)
or other myeloid proliferative disorder (MPD)); (2) Therapy-
related AML (t-AML) (associated with prior
toxin/chemotherapy exposure) and (3) De novo AML [7].
Go to:
4. Cytogenetics
Non-random chromosomal abnormalities (e.g., deletions,
translocations) are identified in approximately 52% of all adult
primary AML patients and have long been recognized as the
genetic events that cause and promote this disease [8]. Certain
cytogenetic abnormalities, including the t(8;21)(q22;q22),
t(15;17)(q22;q12) and inv(16)(p13.1;q22) are associated with
longer remission and survival, while alterations of chromosomes
5, 7, complex karyotype (described as >3 chromosomal
abnormalities) and 11q23 are associated with poor response to
therapy and shorter overall survival [1]. In contrast, about 40%–
50% of all AML cases are cytogenetically normal (CN-AML)
when assessed using conventional banding analysis [9].
Although, this group has an intermediate risk of relapse, a
substantial heterogeneity is found in this population in terms of
clinical outcome. Molecular screening of this AML category is
critical for prognostic categorization and treatment strategy.

Go to:
5. Molecular Abnormalities
During the last decade, several studies have shown that the
presence or absence of specific gene mutations and/or changes
in gene expression can further classify AML cases and have an
effect on the patients’ prognosis [7,10,11]. As stated above, this
is particularly relevant for patients with CN-AML. With the
advent of next generation sequencing, the genetic landscape of
CN-AML has been more defined with each case having an
average of 13 mutations, eight of which are random “passenger”
mutations and five of which are recurrent “driver” mutations
[10]. Key molecular abnormalities have been identified and are
now used to predict outcome and help guide treatment for AML
patients. In the next sections we will describe the most relevant
AML mutations discussed in relative order of frequency.
5.1. Nucleophosmin 1 (NPM1) Mutations
Nucleophosmin 1 (NPM1) mutations are the most frequent
mutation in AML, occurring in 25%–30% of AML patients, with
female predominance [12,13]. NPM1 mutations result in the
aberrant expression of the NPM1 protein in the cytoplasm rather
than the nucleus, stimulating myeloid proliferation and
leukemia development [13,14,15]. Clinically, the mutation is
associated with monocytic morphology and in the absence of
FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 or FLT3-ITD, predicts favorable
overall survival (OS). The reason for improved survival remains
unclear however it has been found that NPM1 mutations have
been associated with chemosensitivity to intensive
chemotherapy in both young and old patients, which may
account for improved outcome [16]. NPM1 mutations are
associated with other recurrent genetic abnormalities such as
+8, DNMT3A mutations, FLT3-ITD (40% of the time), FLT3-
TKD (10%–15%) and IDH mutations (25% of time) [11,17].
5.2. DNA Methyltansferase 3A (DNMT3A) Mutations
Mutations in the DNA methyltansferase 3A (DNMT3A) gene
occurs in 18%–22% of all AML cases and in about 34% of CN-
AML [18]. Missense mutations affecting arginine codon 882

(R882-DNMT3A) are more common than those affecting other
codons (non-R882-DNMT3A) causing a defect in normal
hematopoiesis and proper methylation [17]. Recently, DNMT3A
mutations have been identified as pre-leukemic mutations,
arising early in AML evolution and persisting in times of
remission [19]. The prognostic significance of DNMT3A
mutations is therefore thought to be adverse. Initial studies
showed unfavorable impact on outcome in CN-AML [17].
However, these effects were age related. Younger patients with
non-R882-DNMT3A mutations had shorter disease free survival
(DFS) and overall survival (OS), whereas older patients with
R882-DNMT3A mutations had shorter DFS and OS after
adjustment for other clinical and molecular prognosticators
[17]. A larger study involving more than 1700 AML cases found
no significant impact of DNMT3A mutations on survival end
points [20]. Recently, it was reported that patients with
DNMT3A-mutated AML have an inferior survival when treated
with standard-dose anthracycline induction therapy. Sehgal et
al., concluded that this group should be considered for high-
dose induction therapy [21]. High-dose daunorubicin, as
compared with standard-dose daunorubicin, improved the rate of
survival among patients with DNMT3A or NPM1 mutations or
MLL translocations (p = 0.001) but not among patients with
wild-type DNMT3A, NPM1, and MLL (p = 0.67) [22].
5.3. Fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 3 (FLT3) Mutations
First described in 1991, FLT3 was found to be strongly
expressed in hematopoietic stem cells with important roles in
cell survival and proliferation [23,24]. Internal tandem
duplications (ITD) in the juxta-membrane (JM) domain or
mutations in the second tyrosine kinase domain (TKD) of the
FLT3 gene have been found in 20% of all AML cases and 30%
to 45% of CN-AML patients [1,25]. Both types of mutations
constitutively activate FLT3 signaling, promoting blast
proliferation [25,26]. Indeed patients with FLT3 mutations often
present with extreme leukocytosis and characteristic prominent
nuclear invagination often described as “cuplike” nucleus

[25,27]. Furthermore, FLT3-ITD mutations have been
associated with increased risk of relapse, while the prognostic
relevance of FLT3-TKD mutations is controversial [28]. The
degree to which FLT3-ITD is a biomarker associated with poor
outcome is determined by the binding site and FLT3-ITD allelic
burden [25,28,29]. Studies have shown that non-JM ITD are
worse than JM domain ITD and higher mutant to wild-type
allelic ratios were significantly associated with lower complete
remission (CR) rates [28,29]. Currently, tyrosine kinase
inhibitors (TKI) are being tested in FLT3 mutated AML
patients. Unfortunately, when used alone, TKIs showed only a
transient reduction of blasts, and even if initially effective,
subsequent acquisition of secondary mutations induces
resistance over time [30].
5.4. Isocitrate Dehydrogenase (IDH) Mutations
Mutations of the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) 1 and 2 gene
are gain-of-function mutations which cause loss of the
physiologic enzyme function and create a novel ability of the
enzymes to convert α-ketoglutarate into 2-hydroxyglutarate.
IDH mutations are oncogenic. Specifically recurrent mutations
affecting the highly conserved arginine (R) residue at codon 132
(R132) of IDH1 and at codons R140 and R172 of IDH2 have
been identified in 15%–20% of all AML and 25% to 30% of
patients with CN-AML [11,22,31]. They are found more
frequently in older patients [32]. IDH mutations, in particular
IDH1, are associated with lower DFS and OS in CN-AML cases
with NPM1 mutations and wild type FLT3 [31,32]. Orally
available, selective, potent inhibitors of mutated IDH are
currently being tested in Phase I and II studies in AML with
promising results [33].
5.5. Ten–Eleven Translocation 2 (TET2) Mutations
The ten–eleven translocation oncogene family member 2 (TET2)
is found mutated in about 9%–23% of AML patients [34]. TET1
is an enzyme involved in the conversion of 5-methylcytosine
(5mC) to 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC) in DNA, which is a
process thought to play an important role in DNA demethylation

[34]. In general, TET2 mutations are loss-of-function mutations.
Overall, despite several studies their prognostic significance
remains unclear. Metzeler et al., reported TET2 mutations as an
adverse factor for CR and OS [35]. However Gaidzik et al., did
not show a prognostic effect with TET2 mutations [36].
5.6. Runt-Related Transcription Factor (RUNX1) Mutations
Runt-related transcription factor (RUNX1) has been shown to be
essential in normal hematopoiesis [37]. Also known as AML1
protein or core-binding factor subunit α-2 (CBFA2), RUNX1 is
located at chromosome 21 and is frequently translocated with
the ETO/MTG8/RUNX1T1 gene located on chromosome 8q22,
creating a fusion protein AML-ETO or t(8;21)(q22;q22) AML
[38]. In addition to chromosome translocations, RUNX1
mutations are found in 5%–13% of AML and are commonly
associated with trisomy 13, trisomy 21, absence of NPM1 and
older CN-AML [11]. In general, studies have shown RUNX1
mutations are associated with resistance to standard induction
therapy with inferior overall survival for both younger and older
patients [39].
5.7. CCAAT Enhancer Binding Protein α (CEBPA) Mutations
The differentiation-inducing transcription factor CCAAT
enhancer binding protein α (CBPA) mutations are found in 6%–
10% of all AML and 15%–19% of CN-AML, commonly in
association with del(9q) [1,40]. CEBPA is a critical
transcription factor that controls gene expression during
hematopoiesis [41]. In AML, CEBPA mutations commonly
harbor two mutations or double mutations, which frequently
involve both a combination of an N-terminal and a bZIP gene
mutation. Importantly, only bi allelic mutation, not single,
CEBPA mutations predicted a higher complete response (CR)
and favorable OS, occurring in 4%–5% of AML [42]. AML with
a single CEBPA mutation is associated with survival similar to
that of AML with wild-type CEBPA [11,43].
5.8. Additional Sex Comb-Like 1 (ASXL1) Mutations
Additional sex comb-like 1 (ASXL1) mutations are loss-of-
function mutations that occur in 5%–11% of AML cases [44].

The function of ASXL1 protein is not fully understood, but it is
suggested that it may be involved in epigenetic regulation (DNA
and/or histone modifications) [36]. ASXL1 mutations are five
times more common in older (≥60 years) patients (16.2%) than
those younger than 60 years (3.2%; p < 0.001) [44]. Among
older patients, ASXL1 mutations are associated with t(8;21),
wild-type NPM1, absence of FLT3-ITD, mutated CEBPA, and
overall inferior complete remission and overall survival [45,46].
5.9. Mixed Lineage Leukemia (MLL) Mutations
The mixed lineage leukemia (MLL) gene at chromosome 11q23
encodes for a protein that has histone methyltransferase activity
that coordinates chromatin modification as part of a regulatory
complex [47]. Translocations affecting the MLL gene lead to
aggressive acute lymphoblastic and myeloid leukemia with poor
prognosis that is characterized by HOX gene overexpression
[37]. In addition to translocations, partial in tandem
duplications (PTD) of the MLL gene (MLL-PTD) have been
demonstrated most often in adult de novo CN-AML and in
trisomy 11 AML cases [48,49]. In adult CN-AML, the frequency
of MLL rearrangement is 11% with the presence of the MLL-
PTD associated with a worse prognosis (i.e., shorter duration of
remission) when compared with CN-AML without the MLL-
PTD [50].
5.10. Tumor Protein p53 (TP53) Mutations
The tumor suppressor gene TP53 is found in 8%–14% of AML
cases. These mutations and deletions are primarily associated in
AML with complex karyotype (69%) and are rare in patient
without chromosomal deletions. In general, TP53 mutations
confer a very adverse prognosis with documented
chemoresistance [51].
5.11. c-KIT Mutations
The KIT tyrosine kinase receptor is a 145 kDa transmembrane
protein critical to normal hematopoiesis [52]. This mutation is
rare in AML (<5%) however present approximately 22%–29%
of the time in CBF mutations (i.e., AML harboring
t(8;21)(q22;q22) or inv(16)(p13.1q22) or corresponding

respective fusion genes RUNX1/RUNX1T1 and
CBFB/MYH11).KIT mutations have been shown to confer
higher relapse risk and lower OS. The KIT mutation in the
codon D816 in particular has been associated with unfavorable
DFS and OS, particularly in t(8;21)(q22;q22) patients [53].
Prospective studies later confirmed that patients with CBF AML
harboring KIT mutations have shorter OS than patients with
wild type KIT for t(8;21)(q22;q22) but not for patients with
inv(16)(p13.1q22) [54]. Remarkably KIT could be targeted
pharmacologically by using tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as
dasatinb [52]. Preliminary results were presented recently at the
American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting from a phase
II trial that combined the KIT inhibitor, dasatinib with standard
chemotherapy for newly diagnosed patients with CBF AML.
After a median follow-up of 21 months, patients with KIT
mutations who received dasatinib with standard chemotherapy
showed similar outcomes to that of wild type KIT patients [55].
Unfortunately, no survival benefit was found with maintenance
dasatinib in a phase II study completed by Boissel et al.,
Interestingly, at relapse there was disappearance of the KIT
subclone which is hypothesized to be dasatinib driven [56].
More studies are needed to evaluate the long term outcomes of
KIT inhibitors in CBF AML.
5.12. Spilicing Factor Gene Mutations and Mutations in
Cohesion Complex Members
Often considered founding mutations, spilicing factor gene
mutations have been found to be associated with pre-leukemic
conditions such as MDS. The most common genes reported
include SF3B1, U2AF1, SRSF2 and ZRSR2 [7]. In newly
diagnosed AML patients, splicesome mutations including
SRSF2, F3B1, U2AF1, or ZRSR2 are now considered
pathognomonic of secondary AML developing from precedent
MDS [57]. Somatic cohesion complex mutations were identified
in roughly 20% of patients with high-risk MDS and secondary
AML. Relevant mutations include STAG2, TAD21 and SMC3
which are important in regulating gene expression and DNA-

loop formation. Mutations in cohesion complex members are
associated with poor overall survival [58].
Go to:
6. Prognosis/Risk Stratification
Age and performance status in addition to chromosomal and
molecular aberrations remain the most important tools for
outcome prediction in AML. In 2010, the European
LeukemiaNet (ELN) classification scheme was created in an
effort to standardize risk stratification in adult AML patients by
incorporating cytogenetic and known molecular abnormalities
[59]. Patients are classified into one of four risk groups:
favorable, intermediate 1, intermediate 2 and adverse (Table 1).
Favorable prognosis is associated with acute promyelocytic
leukemia (APL) t(15;17)(q22;q12), balanced abnormalities of
t(8;21)(q22;q22), inv(16)(p13.1q22), t(16;16)(p13.1;q22),
mutated NPM1 without FLT3-ITD and biallelic mutated
CEBPA. Intermediate 1 includes mutated NPM1 with FLT3-
ITD, wild-type NPM1 with or without FLT3-ITD. The
intermediate -2 category includes t(9;11), MLLT3-MLL and
cytogenetic abnormality neither favorable nor adverse. Complex
karyotype, inv(3)(q21q26)/t(3;3)(q21;q26), RPN1-EVI1, DEK-
NUP214 t(6,9)(p23;q34), t(6;11), −5 or del(5q), −7 or abnormal
(17p) and monosomal karyotype are associated with poor
prognosis [59,60]. Patients with monosomal karyotype (defined
as having two of more distinct monosomies or one monosomy
and another structural abnormality) have a very poor prognosis
(less than 4% survival at four years) [61]. Studies have shown
that age >60 is an independent predictor of poor outcomes
regardless of the ELN classification [60].
APL is risk stratified according to the risk of relapse based on
initial white blood count (WBC) and platelet count at diagnosis.
The following patient categories are: (1) low-risk: presenting
WBC count below or equal to 10 × 109/L and platelet count
above 40 × 109/L; (2) intermediate-risk: presenting WBC and
platelet counts below or equal to 10 × 109 and 40 × 109/L,
respectively; and (3) high-risk group: presenting WBC greater

than 10 × 109/L. Treatment strategy varies depending on risk
stratification at diagnosis however, the inclusion of arsenic
trioxide (ATO) in frontline therapy seems to benefit all-risk
category APL patients [62].
Go to:
7. Therapeutics
7.1. Induction Therapy
Since 1970, the backbone of intensive induction chemotherapy
remains unchanged. For young adults (age < 60 years) and fit
elderly patients (especially those harboring NPM1 mutations
and CBF leukemia) the intensive anthracycline and cytarabine
regimen, “7 + 3”, induction therapy is the standard of care. The
typical dose and schedule includes either daunorubicin (60 or 90
mg/m2 on days 1, 2 and 3) or idarubicin (10–12 mg/m2 on days
1, 2 and 3) given with seven days of continuous cytarabine
infusion (100 mg/m2/daily for one week (days 1 through 7). The
goal of induction chemotherapy is to achieve morphologic
complete remission (CR), which is defined as: (1) <5% blasts in
bone marrow aspirate sample with marrow spicules and with a
count of ≥200 nucleated cells (no blasts with Auer rods or
persistence of extramedullary disease); (2) absolute neutrophil
count (ANC) >1000/µL, and (3) platelets ≥ 100,000/µL [63].
Young, de novo, AML patients achieve CR in 65%–73% using
standard induction with “7 + 3” while only 38%–62% of
patients over 60 years of age with AML achieve CR [64,65,66].
Several trials have now shown that higher dose of anthracycline
(90 versus 45 mg/m2) in both younger and older fit adults (from
60 to 65) results in higher CR rates and increases the duration
of OS [65,66]. Concerns about toxicity of high-dose
daunorubicin and the wide use of the 60-mg/m2 dose as a newer
“standard,” led the United Kingdom (UK) National Cancer
Research Council (NCRC) to conduct a prospective randomized
trial with the goal to compare daunorubicin at 60 vs. 90 mg/m2
in the induction of 1206 AML patients [67]. In this study there
was no benefit of using higher dosing (90 mg/m2) over 60
mg/m2 across all subgroups [67]. However there are some

caveats to consider in this trial. In particular, the cumulative
dose of anthracyclines in the low dose arm (60 mg/m2) was
equivalent in the United Kingdom National Cancer Research
Institute (UK NCRC) trial to the higher dose (90 mg/m2) of the
other clinical trials due to multiple courses of anthracycline. In
addition the UK NCRC trial has a shorter follow up [68]. Thus,
it is clear that 45 mg/m2 of daunorubicin seems insufficient and
60 mg/m2 is not inferior to 90 mg/m2 with less associated
toxicity. Patients found to have a FLT3 mutation should be
treated with a FLT3 inhibitor (discussed in more detail below),
such as midostaurin, added to standard induction therapy [69].
Characterizing fitness in the adult population is important when
deciding treatment strategy. In particular, appropriate therapy in
the elderly AML patient should be determined based on
“patient-specific fitness” using geriatric assessments to
determine fitness, vulnerable and frail status regardless of age
[70]. In older adults, deemed not fit for intensive induction
therapy especially harboring complex karyotype without NPM1
mutations, the use of hypomethylating agents including
decitabine and azacitidine has shown to be beneficial
[70,71,72]. Both agents, commonly used to treat myelodisplasia,
have activity in AML as initial induction therapy and in the
relapsed setting. Several phase II and III studies using
azacitadine and decitabine have been conducted [71,72,73]. A
study of 82 patients with AML, median age of 72 years, who
received azacitidine as part of a compassionate use program
showed CR/incomplete CR in 11 of the 35 untreated patients
(31%). The median overall response duration was 13 months
with the one-year and two-years overall survival rates of 58%
and 24%, respectively [73]. Blum et al. showed an even higher
complete remission rate of 47% and overall response rate of
64% with 10 days of low-dose decitabine at 20 mg/m2
intravenous over 1 h [72]. This treatment was well tolerated
with CR achieved in 52% of subjects presenting with CN-AML
and in 50% of those with complex karyotypes [72]. Older
patients receiving induction decitabine usually require a median

of two to four cycles of therapy to have an optimal response.
Patients with suspected acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL)
should be treated with all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) even
before the diagnosis is confirmed. Early use of ATRA decreases
the risk of APL induced coagulopathy, development of
disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) and mortality. For
patients with low-to-intermediate-risk APL (WBC ≤ 10 × 109/L)
outcomes are excellent with the use of ATRA with arsenic
(ATO) [74]. In this non-inferiority study, the ATO-ATRA
combination showed CR rates in all 77 patients (100%) and in
75 of 79 patients (95%) in the ATRA-idarubicin group. The
two-year event-free survival and OS rates were significantly
improved (97% and 99%) in the ATO-ATRA arm than for those
in the ATRA–chemotherapy arm (86% and 91%) [74]. For high-
risk patients (WBC > 10 × 109/L), chemotherapy with
idarubicin should be initiated once the diagnosis is confirmed in
addition to ATO-ATRA for rapid control of leukocytosis.
During induction treatment it is recommended that WBC,
fibrinogen level, prothrombin time and partial thromboplastin
time be monitored at least twice daily with aggressive
transfusion support (platelet count ≥ 30 × 109/L and fibrinogen
level ≥ 1.5 g/L). Prophylactic steroids are also recommended, in
particular when using ATRA/ATO combination for induction in
patients with high WBC count to prevent differentiation
syndrome [74,75].
7.2. Consolidation Strategies
Consolidation or post-induction therapy is given to prevent
relapse and eradicate minimal residual leukemia (MRD) in the
bone marrow after induction as a bridge to transplant or to
achieve cure. Assessment of minimal residual disease using
real-time PCR or Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) is
increasingly being used to help track treatment response and has
been shown to be superior than morphology alone in predicting
impending relapse [76,77]. Despite this powerful information,
the heterogentiy of AML in general has made following
mutational clones difficult to determine absolute risk of

leukemia development as some clones can persist in patient in
long-term remission following treatment, such as DNMT3A
[19]. In general, there are two main strategies for consolidation;
chemotherapy (including targeted agents) and hematopoietic
stem cell transplantation [64]. Both strategies could be used
alone or most commonly in combination depending on the type
of leukemia, the fitness of the patient and the availability of a
stem cell donor. Post induction chemotherapy using
intermediate-dose cytarabine 1.5 g/m2 twice daily on days 1, 3
and 5 given in three to four cycles is an effective and
established regimen to prolong remission and improve survival
in favorable risk young adults (<60 year of age) [8]. These
patients are usually treated with chemotherapy alone and
transplantation is reserved only at relapse [64]. In 2013, Burnett
et al. challenged this dose schedule for adults <60 year old and
showed that higher dose (3 g/m2) as compared to lower dose
(1.5 g/m2) cytarabine for three courses led to identical
outcomes [78]. Thus, low dose cytarabine at 1.5 g/m2 became
the standard of care. High-dose cytarabine is still used for
patients with CBF AML [e.g., t(8:21); or inv(16)] and NPM1
mutated AML [8,78]. In elderly patients (>60 year of age) there
was no benefit with high dose cytarabine with increased and
sometimes irreversible neurotoxicity noted [79], therefore 500–
1000 mg/m2 is standardly used [1].
For other prognostic groups, in particular fit patients with
intermediate risk or high risk disease after achieving CR,
allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation remains the
most effective long term therapy for AML with cure in 50% to
60% of patients in first CR [80,81]. Despite this, several
patients never become eligible for transplant given co-
morbidities, failure to achieve CR or lack of suitable donor
[80]. While waiting for transplant it is standard practice to give
post induction chemotherapy to maintain CR and keep the
leukemia burden low. Decisions regarding consolidation rather
than moving straight to transplant should be individualized as
consolidation therapy poses risk of morbidity and mortality,

which may hinder eventual curative transplant. Recent evidence
unanimously confirms that age should no longer be used as the
sole criteria for transplant eligibility [80,82]. Rather eligibility
should be decided upon based on pre-transplant performance
status, co-morbidities and current remission. The most widely
recognized and validated tool for assessing comorbidity
includes the Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Comorbidity
Index (HCT-CI) [82]. The higher the comorbidity index score,
the worse the clinical outcome. Improvements in supportive
care, increased donor options (haplo-identical donors and cord
grafts) and reduced intensity preparation regimens for HCT
have increased the success of transplant in all age groups. It is
for this reason that we advocate for early patient discussion,
risk assessment and tissue typing at diagnosis. Conditioning
regimen should be decided based on patient fitness, transplant
options and disease characteristics. Although risk of relapse is
higher, long term outcomes of reduced-intensity allogeneic
hematopoietic stem cell transplant in patients who were
ineligible for myeloablative transplant are promising [81]. The
results of a prospective multicenter phase II trial conduced by
the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (formerly Cancer
and Leukemia Group B) and the Blood and Marrow Transplant
Clinical trial Network showed reduced intensity conditioning-
based hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) to be an
effective strategy for suitable older patients with an available
matched donor with a disease-free survival and OS at two years
after transplant of 42% and 48%, respectively [83]. Reduced
intensity transplants are therefore becoming more common and
clinically accepted.
7.3. Relapsed Disease
Of the patients who relapse, only a small fraction achieve
successful second remission using salvage chemotherapy
followed by allogeneic stem cell transplant with curative intent
[64]. Studies examining clonal evolution of relapse show that
relapse can occur from expansion of major or minor clones
present at diagnosis or through newly acquired mutations over

time [2]. Therefore, clinical trial is the preferred treatment
approach especially in light of novel targeted therapies. Early
relapse (occurring within the first six months after CR1)
portends a poor overall survival. Salvage regimes include
intermediate dose cytarabine (500–1500 mg/m2 intravenously
every 12 h on days 1–3); MEC (Mitoxantrone 8 mg/m2 on days
1–5, Etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1–5, and Cytarabine 100
mg/m2 on days 1–5) or lastly, FLAG-IDA (Fludarabine 30
mg/m2, intravenously on days 1–5 (20 mg/m2 in patient >60
years old), Cytarabine 1500 mg/m2 (500–1000 mg/m2 in
patients >60 year) intravenously, 4 h after fludarabine infusion,
on days 1–5; Idarubicin 8 mg/m2, intravenously, on days 3–5;
Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor 5 μg/kg, subcutaneously,
from day 6 to white-cell count >1 g/L (FLAG-IDA) [1]. The
likelihood of achieving a second CR is best in patients with a
long first remission, younger age and in those with favorable
cytogenetics [84]. In cases of APL, re-induction with ATO with
or without ATRA remains the standard. CR rates with single
agent ATO are good at roughly 85% [85].
Go to:
8. Novel Targets
8.1. Fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 3 (FLT3) Inhibitors
Several FLT3 small molecule inhibitors have been developed
with mixed results. First generation drugs include multi-kinase
inhibitors such as midostaurin, lestaurtinib, tandutinib sunitinib
and sorafenib. When used as single agents they have limited
anti-leukemia activity mostly showing only transient reduction
of blood and bone marrow blasts and increased toxicity [86]. In
a randomized trial of 224 patients with FLT3 mutated AML in
first relapse lestaurtinib did not increase the response rate or
prolong survival [87]. Single agent use with midostantrum,
tandutinib and KW2449 in phase I/II trials were also not
clinically effective [88,89,90]. Combination therapy using FLT3
inhibitors with chemotherapy have also been conducted. Serve
et al. reported a randomized trial of 201 newly diagnosed older
AML patients, using the addition of sorafenib to induction and

consolidation therapy. Unfortunately, sorafenib did not improve
outcomes and patients did worse in the sorafenib arm due to
higher treatment-related mortality and lower CR rates [91]. A
recent phase II study of sorafenib in combination with 5-
azacitadine in relapsed/refractory FLT3-ITD mutant AML
demonstrated a response rate of 46%, mostly consisting of CR
or CR with incomplete count recovery [92]. Sunitinib added to
induction and consolidation chemotherapy in older patients with
AML and FLT3 activating mutations showed some effectiveness
with CR rates 53% (8/15) and 71% (5/7) for patients with FLT3-
ITD and FLT3-TKD mutations, respectively. The 13 patients
who achieved CR went on to be consolidated with high dose
cytarabine and 7/13 received sunitinib maintenance. The median
overall survival in this study was 18.8 months [93]. The largest
randomized, phase III clinical trial in FLT3-mutated AML
conduced to date was recently presented at the 2015 American
Society of Hematology (ASH) Plenary session showing the
benefit of midostaurin added to induction chemotherapy
(RATIFY trial) in which patients receiving midostaurin had
significantly longer median OS than those receiving placebo:
74.7 versus 25.6 months (p = 0.0076) [94]. Second generation
agents, promising to have better potency and less side effects
include quizartinib and crenolanib are still undergoing clinical
investigation. One trial, using quizartinib (AC220), did show
better blast count clearance however also noted the development
of secondary resistance. Drug resistance has since become the
major challenge in treating patients with a single FLT3
inhibitor. The point mutations identified which lead to
resistance include N676, F691, and D835 within the kinase
domain of FLT3-ITD [95]. The novel FLT3 inhibitors, G-749
and ASP2215 (active against both FLT3 ITD and D835
mutations), have recently been shown to provide sustained
inhibition of FLT3 phosphorylation and increased ability to
overcome drug resistance in pre-clinical trials but further
studies are needed to determine if it will have clinical efficacy
[96,97].

8.2. Isocitrate Dehydrogenase (IDH) Inhibitors
The IDH1 inhibitor AG-120 and the IDH2 inhibitor AG-221
have demonstrated promising response rates in patients with
AML in two separate phase I clinical trials [98,99]. Preliminary
results were recently presented for both trials. The objective
response rate (ORR) with AG-221 was 40% and 31% with AG-
120 in relapsed/refractory AML patients. More interestingly the
duration of the responses for AG-221 and AG-120 were more
than 15 and 11 months at the analysis, and remained ongoing.
Overall, 76% of responses lasted longer than six months. Based
on these data, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have
granted the medication an orphan drug designation for patients
with AML.
8.3. Nuclear Exporter Inhibitors
The anti-leukemic efficacy of reversible inhibitors of the major
nuclear export receptor, chromosome region maintenance 1
(CRM1, also termed XPO1) has brought much excitement.
CRM1 is a major nuclear exporter protein which mediates the
export and inactivation of several tumor suppressors such as
p53, p73, FOXO1, RB1 and p21 (CDKN1A) among others
[100]. CRM1 has been shown to be upregulated in a range of
solid tumors and hematological malignancies, including AML
[101,102]. Preclinical studies indicate that treatment of AML
cell lines, patient samples and AML xenografts with novel
CRM1 inhibitors (Selinexor) induces strong anti-leukemic
effects [103,104]. Based on these studies, Phase I/II clinical
trials are currently ongoing to assess the safety, tolerability and
activity of selinexor in AML patients.
8.4. Immune Therapies
Novel antibody therapies are revolutionary in the treatment
leukemia and currently under development in AML. Monoclonal
antibodies being explored include CD33 (Gemtuzumab
ozogamicin) [105] and bispecific antibodies such as AMG 330
(anti-CD33 and CD3) [106]. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-
transduced T cells (CARTs) are T cells engineered to express a
specific antigen receptor target designed against a specific cell-

surface antigen. CD123 has been found to be expressed on the
majority of AML blasts but also normal hematopoietic cells.
Preclinical data shows that targeting CD123 via CARTs results
in rejection of human AML and myeloablation in the mouse
models [107].
9. Conclusions
AML is complex disease with a diverse genetic landscape. The
field is rapidly expanding with increased understanding of the
biology as well as potential new drug targets. Despite our best
efforts at targeted therapy, it has become apparent that single
drug options may be less likely to succeed over multiple drug
targets. Relapse disease remains the highest cause of mortality
after HCT. Immunotherapy is also an exciting new therapeutic
approach which may offer long term cures for relapsed patients.
We remain hopeful that the therapeutic options will continue to
improve, with less toxicity and improved efficacy.
References
1. Döhner H., Weisdorf D.J., Bloomfield C.D. Acute myeloid
leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015;373:1136–1152. [PubMed]
[Google Scholar]
2. Ding L., Ley T.J., Larson D.E., Miller C.A., Koboldt D.C.,
Welch J.S., Ritchey J.K., Young M.A., Lamprecht T., McLellan
M.D., et al. Clonal evolution in relapsed acute myeloid
leukaemia revealed by whole-genome sequencing. Nature.
2012;481:506–510. doi: 10.1038/nature10738. [PMC free
article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
3. Campos L., Guyotat D., Archimbaud E., Devaux Y., Treille
D., Larese A., Maupas J., Gentilhomme O., Ehrsam A., Fiere D.
Surface marker expression in adult myeloid leukemia:
Correlations with initial characteristics, morphology and
response to therapy. Br. J. Haematol. 1989;72:161–166. doi:
10.1111/j.1365-2141.1989.tb07677.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
4. Wolach O., Stone R.M. How I treat mixed-phenotype acute

leukemia. Blood. 2015;125:2477–2485. doi: 10.1182/blood-
2014-10-551465. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
5. Bennett J.M., Catovsky D., Daniel M.T., Flandrin G., Galton
D.A., Gralnick H.R., Sultan C. Proposals for the classification
of the acute leukaemias. French-American-British (FAB) co-
operative group. Br. J. Haematol. 1976;33:451–458. doi:
10.1111/j.1365-2141.1976.tb03563.x. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
6. Vardiman J.W., Thiele J., Arber D.A., Brunning R.D.,
Borowitz M.J., Porwit A., Harris N.L., le Beau M.M.,
Hellstrom-Lindberg E., Tefferi A., et al. The 2008 revision of
the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid
neoplasms and acute leukemia: Rationale and important
changes. Blood. 2009;114:937–951. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-
03-209262. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
7. Lindsley R.C., Mar B.G., Mazzola E., Grauman P.V., Shareef
S., Allen S.L., Pigneux A., Wetzler M., Stuart R.K., Erba H.P.,
et al. Acute myeloid leukemia ontogeny is defined by distinct
somatic mutations. Blood. 2015;125:1367–1376. doi:
10.1182/blood-2014-11-610543. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
8. Byrd J.C., Mrózek K., Dodge R.K., Carroll A.J., Edwards
C.G., Arthur D.C., Pettenati M.J., Patil S.R., Rao K.W., Watson
M.S., et al. Pretreatment cytogenetic abnormalities are
predictive of induction success, cumulative incidence of
relapse, and overall survival in adult patients with de novo
acute myeloid leukemia: Results from Cancer and Leukemia
Group B (CALGB 8461) Blood. 2002;100:4325–4336. doi:
10.1182/blood-2002-03-0772. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
9. Gaidzik V., Dohner K. Prognostic implications of gene
mutations in acute myeloid leukemia with normal cytogenetics.
Semin. Oncol. 2008;35:346–355. doi:
10.1053/j.seminoncol.2008.04.005. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
10. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network Genomic and

epigenomic landscapes of adult de novo acute myeloid
leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013;368:2059–2074. [PMC free
article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Marcucci G., Haferlach T., Dohner H. Molecular genetic of
adult acute myeloid leukemia: Prognostic and therapeutic
implications. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011;29:475–486. doi:
10.1200/JCO.2010.30.2554. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
12. Schnittger S., Schoch C., Kern W., Mecucci C., Tschulik C.,
Martelli M.F., Haferlach T., Hiddemann W., Falini B.
Nucleophosmin gene mutations are predictors of favorable
prognosis in acute myelogenous leukemia with a normal
karyotype. Blood. 2005;106:3733–3739. doi: 10.1182/blood-
13. Falini B., Nicoletti I., Martelli M.F., Mecucci C. Acute
myeloid leukemia carrying cytoplasmic/mutated nucleophosmin
(NPMc + AML): Biologic and clinical features. Blood.
2007;109:874–885. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-07-012252.
[PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
14. Falini B., Bolli N., Shan J., Martelli M.P., Liso A.,
Pucciarini A., Bigerna B., Pasqualucci L., Mannucci R., Rosati
R., et al. Both carboxy-terminus NES motif and mutated
tryptophan(s) are crucial for aberrant nuclear export of
nucleophosmin leukemic mutants in NPMc + AML. Blood.
2006;107:4514–4523. doi: 10.1182/blood-2005-11-4745.
15. Cheng K., Sportoletti P., Ito K., Clohessy J.G., Teruya-
Feldstein J., Kutok J.L., Pandolfi P.P. The cytoplasmic NPM
mutant induces myeloproliferation in a transgenic mouse model.
Blood. 2010;115:3341–3345. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-03-
208587. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
16. Dohner K., Schlenk R.F., Habdank M., Scholl C., Rucker
F.G., Corbacioglu A., Bullinger L., Frohling S., Dohner H.
Mutant nucleophosmin (NPM1) predicts favorable prognosis in
younger adults with acute myeloid leukemia and normal

cytogenetics: Interaction with other gene mutations. Blood.
2005;106:3740–3746. doi: 10.1182/blood-2005-05-2164.
17. Marcucci G., Metzeler K.H., Schwind S., Becker H.,
Maharry K., Mrozek K., Radmacher M.D., Kohlschmidt J.,
Nicolet D., Whitman S.P., et al. Age-related prognostic impact
of different types of DNMT3A mutations in adults with primary
cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol.
2012;30:742–750. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.39.2092. [PMC free
18. Ley T.J., Ding L., Walter M.J., McLellan M.D., Lamprecht
T., Larson D.E., Kandoth C., Payton J.E., Baty J., Welch J., et
al. DNMT3A mutations in acute myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J.
Med. 2010;363:2424–2433. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1005143.
[PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
19. Shlush L.I., Zandi S., Mitchell A., Chen W.C., Brandwein
J.M., Gupta V., Kennedy J.A., Schimmer A.D., Schuh A.C., Yee
K., et al. Identification of pre-leukaemic haematopoietic stem
cells in acute leukaemia. Nature. 2014;506:328–333. doi:
10.1038/nature13038. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
20. Gaidzik V.I., Schlenk R.F., Paschka P., Stölzle A., Späth D.,
Kuendgen A., von Lilienfeld-Toal M., Brugger W., Derigs H.G.,
Kremer S., et al. Clinical impact of DNMT3A mutations in
younger adult patient with acute myeloid leukemia: A
comprehensive analysis of the AML study Group (AMLSG)
Blood. 2013;121:4769–4777. doi: 10.1182/blood-2012-10-
461624. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
21. Sehgal A.R., Gimotty P.A., Zhao J., Hsu J.M., Daber R.,
Morrissette J.D., Luger S., Loren A.W., Carroll M. DNMT3A
mutational status affects the results of dose-escalated induction
therapy in acute myelogenous leukemia. Clin. Cancer Res.
2015;21:1614–1620. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0327.
22. Patel J.P., Gonen M., Figueroa M.E., Fernandez H., Sun Z.,
Racevskis J. Prognostic relevance of integrated genetic

profiling in acute myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med.
2012;366:1079–1089. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1112304. [PMC free
23. Maroc N., Rottapel R., Rosnet O., Marchetto S., Lavezzi C.,
Mannoni P., Birnbaum D., Dubreuil P. Biochemical
characterization and analysis of the transforming potential of
the FLT3/FLK2 receptor tyrosine kinase. Oncogene.
1993;8:909–918. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
24. Gilliland D.G., Griffin J.D. The roles of FLT3 in
hematopoiesis and leukemia. Blood. 2002;100:1532–1542. doi:
Scholar]
25. Kelly L.M., Liu Q., Kutok J.L., Williams I.R., Boulton C.L.,
Gilliland D.G. FLT3 internal tandem duplication mutations
associated with human acute myeloid leukemias induce
myeloproliferative disease in a murine bone marrow transplant
model. Blood. 2002;99:310–318. doi: 10.1182/blood.V99.1.310.
26. Kayser S., Schlenk R.F., Londono M.C., Breitenbuecher F.,
Wittke K., Du J., Groner S., Späth D., Krauter J. Insertion of
FLT3 internal tandem duplication in the tyrosine kinase domain-
1 is associated with resistance to chemotherapy and inferior
outcome. Blood. 2009;114:2386–2392. doi: 10.1182/blood-
27. Kussick S.J., Stirewalt D.L., Yi H.S., Sheets K.M.,
Pogosova-Agadjanyan E., Braswell S., Norwood T.H., Radich
J., Wood B.L. A distinctive nuclear morphology in acute
myeloid leukemia is strongly associated with loss of HLA-DR
expression and FLT3 internal tandem duplication. Leukemia.
2004;18:1591–1598. doi: 10.1038/sj.leu.2403458. [PubMed]
28. Gale R.E., Green C., Allen C., Mead A.J., Burnett A.K.,
Hills R.K., Linch D.C., Medical Research Council Adult
Leukaemia Working Party The impact on FLT3 internal tandem
duplication mutant level, number, size and interaction with
NPM1 mutation in a large cohort of young adult patient with

acute myeoid leukemia. Blood. 2008;111:2776–2784. doi:
Scholar]
29. Pratcorona M., Brunet S., Nomdedeu J., Ribera J.M., Tormo
M., Duarte R., Escoda L., Guàrdia R., Queipo de Llano M.P.,
Salamero O., et al. Favorable outcome of patients with acute
myeloid leukemia harboring a low-allelic burden LFT3-ITD
mutation and concomitant NPM1 mutations: Relevance to post-
remission therapy. Blood. 2013;121:2734–2738. doi:
Scholar]
30. Small D. Targeting FLT3 for the treatment of leukemia.
Semin. Hematol. 2008;45:S17–S21. doi:
10.1053/j.seminhematol.2008.07.007. [PMC free article]
31. Marcucci G., Maharry K., Wu Y.Z., Radmacher M.D.,
Mrózek K., Margeson D., Holland K.B., Whitman S.P., Becker
H., Schwind S., et al. IDH1 and IDH2 gene mutations identify
novel molecular subsets within de novo cytogenetically normal
acute myeloid leukemia: A cancer and leukemia group B study.
J. Clin. Oncol. 2010;28:2348–2355. doi:
10.1200/JCO.2009.27.3730. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
32. Paschka P., Schlenk R.F., Gaidzik V.I., Habdank M.,
Krönke J., Bullinger L., Späth D., Kayser S., Zucknick M.,
Götze K., et al. IDH1 and IDH2 mutations are frequent genetic
alterations in acute myeloid leukemia and confer adverse
prognosis in cytogenetically normal acute myeloid leukemia
with NPM1 mutation without FLT3 internal tandem duplication.
J. Clin. Oncol. 2010;28:3636–3643. doi:
Scholar]
33. Fathi A.T., Wander S.A., Faramand R., Emadi A.
Biochemical, epigenetic, and metabolic approaches to target
IDH mutations in acute myeloid leukemia. Semin. Hematol.
2015;52:165–171. doi: 10.1053/j.seminhematol.2015.03.002.

34. Chou W.C., Chou S.C., Liu C.Y., Chen C.Y., Hou H.A., Kuo
Y.Y., Lee M.C., Ko B.S., Tang J.L., Yao M., et al. TET2
mutation is an unfavorable prognostic factor in acute myeloid
leukemia patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics. Blood.
2011;118:3803–3810. doi: 10.1182/blood-2011-02-339747.
35. Metzeler K.H., Maharry K., Radmacher M.D., Mrozek K.,
Margeson D., Becker H. TET2 mutations improve the new
European LeukemiaNet risk classification of acute myeloid
leukemia: A cancer and leukemia group B study. J. Clin. Oncol.
2011;29:1373–1381. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.32.7742. [PMC
free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
36. Gaidzik V.I., Paschka P., Spath D., Habdank M., Kohne
C.H., Germing U., von Lilienfeld-Toal M., Held G., Horst H.A.,
Haase D., et al. TET2 mutations in acute myeloid leukemia
(AML): Results from a comprehensive genetic and clinical
analysis of the AML study group. J. Clin. Oncol. 2012;30:1350–
1357. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.39.2886. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
37. Meyers S., Downing J.R., Hiebert S.W. Identification of
AML-1 and the (8;21) translocation protein (AML-1/ETO) as
sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins: The runt homology
domain is required for DNA binding and protein-protein
interactions. Mol. Cell Biol. 1993;13:6336–6345. doi:
10.1128/MCB.13.10.6336. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
38. Tang J.L., Hou H.A., Chem C.Y., Liu C.Y., Chou W.C.,
Tseng M.H. AML1/RUNX1 mutations in 470 adult patients with
de novo acute myeloid leukemia: Prognostic implication and
interaction with other gene alternations. Blood. 2009;114:5352–
5361. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-05-223784. [PubMed]
39. Mendler J.H., Maharry K., Radmacher M.D., Mrozek K.,
Becker H., Metzeler K.H. RUNX1 mutations are associated with
poor outcome in younger and older patients with cytogenetically

normal acute myeloid leukemia and with distinct gene and
MicroRNA expression signatures. J. Clin. Oncol. 2012;30:3109–
3118. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.40.6652. [PMC free article]
40. Mrózek K., Marcucci G., Paschka P., Whitman S.P.,
Bloomfield C.D. Clinical relevance of mutations and gene-
expression changes in adult acute myeloid leukemia with normal
cytogenetics: Are we ready for a prognostically prioritized
molecular classification? Blood. 2007;109:431–448. doi:
41. Koschmieder S., Halmos B., Levantini E., Tenen D.G.
Dysregulation of the C/EBPα differentiation pathway in human
cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009;27:619–628. doi:
42. Fasan A., Haferlach C., Alpermann T., Jeromin S.,
Grossmann V., Eder C., Weissmann S., Dicker F., Kohlmann A.,
Schindela S., et al. The role of different genetic subtypes of
CEBPA mutated AML. Leukemia. 2014;28:794–803. doi:
10.1038/leu.2013.273. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
43. Wouters B.J., Lowenberg B., Erpelinck-Verschueren C.A.,
van Putten W.L., Valk P.J., Delwel R. Double CEBPA
mutations, but not single CEBPA mutations, define a subgroup
of acute myeloid leukemia with a distinctive gene expression
profile that is uniquely associated with a favorable outcome.
Blood. 2009;113:3088–3091. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-09-
Scholar]
44. Metzeler K.H., Becker H., Maharry K., Radmacher M.D.,
Kohlschmidt J., Mrózek K., Nicolet D., Whitman S.P., Wu Y.Z.,
Schwind S., et al. ASXL1 mutations identify a high risk
subgroup of older patients with primary cytogenetically normal
AML within the ELN Favorable genetic category. Blood.
2011;118:6920–6929. doi: 10.1182/blood-2011-08-368225.

45. Alpermann T., Haferlach C., Eder C., Nadarajah N.,
Meggendorfer M., Kern W., Haferlach T., Schnittger S. AML
with gain of chromosome 8 as the sole chromosomal
abnormality (+8sole) is associated with a specific molecular
mutation pattern including ASXL1 mutation in 46.8% of the
patients. Leuk. Res. 2015;39:265–272. doi:
10.1016/j.leukres.2014.11.026. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
46. Micol J.B., Duployez N., Boissel N., Petit A., Geffroy S.,
Nibourel O., Lacombe C., Lapillonne H., Etancelin P., Figeac
M., et al. Frequent ASXL2 mutations in acute myeloid leukemia
patients with t(8;21)/RUNX1-RUNX1T1 chromosomal
translocations. Blood. 2014;124:1445–1449. doi:
47. Ernest P., Wang J., Korsmeyer S.J. The role of MLL in
hematopoiesis and leukemia. Curr. Opin. Hematol. 2002;9:282–
287. doi: 10.1097/00062752-200207000-00004. [PubMed]
48. Caligiuri M.A., Schichman S.A., Strout M.P., Mrózek K.,
Baer M.R., Frankel S.R., Barcos M., Herzig G.P., Croce C.M.,
Bloomfield C.D. Molecular rearrangement of the ALL-1 gene in
acute myeloid leukemia without cytogenetic evidence of 11q23
chromosomal translocations. Cancer Res. 1994;54:370–373.
[PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49. Caligiuri M.A., Strout M.P., Lawrence D., Arthur D.C.,
Baer M.R., Yu F., Knuutila S., Mrozek K., Oberkircher A.R.,
Marcucci G., et al. Rearrangement of ALL1 (MLL) in acute
myeloid leukemia with normal cytogenetics. Cancer Res.
1998;58:55–59. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
50. Dohner K., Tobis K., Ulrich R., Frohling S., Benner A.,
Schlenk R.F., Dohner H. Prognostic significance of partial
tandem duplications of the MLL gene in adult patients 16 to 60
years old with acute myeloid leukemia and normal cytogenetics:
A study of the acute myeloid leukemia study group Ulm. J. Clin.
Oncol. 2002;20:3254–3261. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2002.09.088.

51. Haferlach C., Dicker F., Herholz H., Schnittger S., Kern W.,
Haferlach T. Mutations of the TP53 gene in acute myeloid
leukemia are strongly associated with a complex aberrant
karyotype. Leukemia. 2008;22:1539–1541. doi:
10.1038/leu.2008.143. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
52. Sattler M., Salgia R. Targeting c-Kit mutations: Basic
science to novel therapies. Leuk. Res. 2004;28:S11–S20. doi:
10.1016/j.leukres.2003.10.004. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
53. Paschka P., Marcucci G., Ruppert A.S., Mrozek K., Chen
H., Kittles R.A., Vukosavljevic T., Perrotti D., Vardiman J.W.,
Carroll A.J., et al. Adverse prognostic significance of KIT
mutations in adult acute myeloid leukemia with inv(16) and
t(8;21): A cancer and leukemia group B study. J. Clin. Oncol.
2006;24:3904–3911. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.9500. [PubMed]
54. Boissel N., Leroy H., Brethon B., Philippe N., de Botton S.,
Auvrignon A., Raffoux E., Leblanc T., Thomas X., Hermine O.,
et al. Incidence and prognostic impact of c-Kit, FLT3, and Ras
gene mutations in core binding factor acute myeloid leukemia
(CBF-AML) Leukemia. 2006;20:965–970. doi:
10.1038/sj.leu.2404188. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
55. Marcucci G., Geyer S., Zhao W., Caroll A.J., Bucci D., Uy
G.L., Blum W., Pardee T., Wetzler M., Stock W., et al. Adding
KIT inhibitor dasatinib (DAS) to chemotherapy overcomes the
negative impact of KIT mutation/over-expression in core
binding factor (CBF) acute myeloid leukemia (AML): Results
from CLGB 10801 (Alliance) Blood. 2014;124:8. [Google
Scholar]
56. Boissel N., Renneville A., Leguay T., Lefebvre P.C., Recher
C., Lecerf T., Delabesse E., Berthon C., Blanchet O., Prebet T.,
et al. Dasatinib in high-risk core binding factor acute myeloid
leukemia in first complete remission: A french acute myeloid
leukemia intergroup trial. Haematologica. 2015;100:780–785.
doi: 10.3324/haematol.2014.114884. [PMC free article]

57. Cazzola M., Della Porta M.G., Malcovati L. The genetic
basis of myelodysplasia and its clinical relevance. Blood.
2013;122:4021–4034. doi: 10.1182/blood-2013-09-381665.
58. Thota S., Viny A.D., Makishima H., Spitzer B.,
Radivoyevitch T., Przychodzen B., Sekeres M.A., Levine R.L.,
Maciejewski J.P. Genetic alterations of the cohesin complex
genes in myeloid malignancies. Blood. 2014;124:1790–1798.
doi: 10.1182/blood-2014-04-567057. [PMC free article]
59. Dohner H., Estey E.H., Amadori S., Appelbaum F.R.,
Buchner T., Burnett A.K., Dombret H., Fenaux P., Grimwade
D., Larson R.A., et al. Diagnosis and management of acute
myeloid leukemia in adults: Recommendations from an
international expert panel, on behalf of the European
LeukemiaNet. Blood. 2010;115:453–474. doi: 10.1182/blood-
60. Mrozek K., Marcucci G., Nicolet D., Maharry K.S., Becker
H., Whitman S.P., Metzeler K.H., Schwind S., Wu Y.Z.,
Kohlschmidt J., et al. Prognostic significance of the European
LeukemiaNet standardized system for reporting cytogenetic and
molecular alterations in adults with acute myeloid leukemia. J.
Clin. Oncol. 2012;30:4515–4523. doi:
61. Medeiros B.C., Othus M., Fang M., Roulston D., Appelbaum
F.R. Prognostic impact of monosomal karyotype in young adult
and elderly acute myeloid leukemia: The South-west Oncology
Group (SWOG) experience. Blood. 2010;116:2224–2228. doi:
62. Sanz M.A., Lo Coco F., Martin G., Avvisati G., Rayon C.,
Barbui T., Diaz-Mediavilla J., Fioritoni G., Gonzalez J.D., Liso
V., et al. Definition of relapse risk and role of nonanthracycline
drugs for consolidation in patients with acute promyelocytic

leukemia: A joint study of the PETHEMA and GIMEMA
cooperative groups. Blood. 2000;96:1247–1253. [PubMed]
[Google Scholar]
63. Cheson B.D., Bennett J.M., Kopecky K.J., Buchner T.,
Willman C.L., Estey E.H., Schiffer C.A., Doehner H., Tallman
M.S., Lister T.A., et al. Revised recommendations of the
international working group for diagnosis, standardization of
response criteria, treatment outcomes, and reporting standards
for therapeutic trials in acute myeloid leukemia. J. Clin. Oncol.
2003;21:4642–4649. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.04.036. [PubMed]
64. Estey E., Döhner H. Acute myeloid leukaemia. Lancet.
2006;368:1894–1907. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69780-8.
65. Lowenberg B., Ossenkoppele G.J., van Putten W., Schouten
H.C., Graux C., Ferrant A., Sonneveld P., Maertens J., Jongen-
Lavrencic M., von Lilienfeld-Toal M., et al. High-dose
daunorubicin in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia. N.
Engl. J. Med. 2009;361:1235–1248. doi:
10.1056/NEJMoa0901409. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
66. Fernandez H.F., Sun Z., Yao X., Litzow M.R., Luger S.M.,
Paietta E.M., Racevskis J., Dewald G.W., Ketterling R.P.,
Bennett J.M., et al. Anthracycline Dose Intensification in Acute
Myeloid Leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2009;361:1249–1259. doi:
10.1056/NEJMoa0904544. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
67. Burnett A.K., Russell N.H., Hills R.K., Kell J., Cavenagh J.,
Kjeldsen L., McMullin M., Cahalin P., Dennis M., Friis L., et
al. A randomized comparison of daunorubicin 90 mg/m2 vs 60
mg/m2 in AML Induction: Results from the UK NCRI AML17
Trial in 1206 Patients. Blood. 2015;125:3878–3885. doi:
68. Fernandez H.F. Beyond the first glance: Anthracyclines in
AML. Blood. 2015;125:3828–3829. doi: 10.1182/blood-2015-

04-639419. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
69. Stone R.M., O’Donnell M.R., Sekeres M.A. Acute myeloid
leukemia. Hematol. Am. Soc. Hematol. Educ. Program.
2004;2004:98–117. doi: 10.1182/asheducation-2004.1.98.
70. Klepin H. Geriatric perspective: How to assess fitness for
chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukemia. Hematol. Am. Soc.
Hematol. Educ. Program. 2014;2014:8–13. doi:
10.1182/asheducation-2014.1.8. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
71. Quintas-Cardama A., Ravandi F., Liu-Dumlao T., Brandt
M., Faderl S., Pierce S., Borthakur G., Garcia-Manero G.,
Cortes J., Kantarjian H. Epigenetic therapy is associated with
similar survival compared with intensive chemotherapy in older
patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Blood.
2012;120:4840–4845. doi: 10.1182/blood-2012-06-436055.
72. Blum W., Garzon R., Klisovic R.B., Schwind S., Walker A.,
Geyer S., Liu S., Havelange V., Becker H., Schaaf L., et al.
Clinical response and miR-29b predictive significance in older
AML patients treated with a 10-day schedule of decitabine.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2010;107:7473–7478. doi:
10.1073/pnas.1002650107. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
73. Maurillo L., Venditti A., Spagnoli A., Gaidano G., Ferrero
D., Oliva E., Lunghi M., D'Arco A.M., Levis A., Pastore D., et
al. Azacitidine for the treatment of patients with acute myeloid
leukemia: Report of 82 patients enrolled in an Italian
Compassionate Program. Cancer. 2012;118:1014–1022. doi:
10.1002/cncr.26354. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
74. Lo-Coco F., Avvisati G., Vignetti M., Thiede C., Orlando
S.M., Iacobelli S., Ferrara F., Fazi P., Cicconi L., Di Bona E.,
et al. Retinoic acid and arsenic trioxide for acute promyelocytic
leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 2013;369:111–121. doi:
10.1056/NEJMoa1300874. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]

75. Mi J.Q., Li J.M., Shen Z.X., Chen S.J., Chen Z. How to
manage acute promyelocytic leukemia. Leukemia.
2012;26:1743–1751. doi: 10.1038/leu.2012.57. [PubMed]
76. Grimwade D., Freeman S.D. Defining minimal residual
disease in acute myeloid leukemia: Which platforms are ready
for “prime time”? Blood. 2014;124:3345–3355. doi:
Scholar]
77. Kohlmann A., Nadarajah N., Alpermann T., Grossmann V.,
Schindela S., Dicker F., Roller A., Kern W., Haferlach C.,
Schnittger S., et al. Monitoring of residual disease by next-
generation deep-sequencing of RUNX1 mutations can identify
acute myeloid leukemia patients with resistant disease.
Leukemia. 2014;28:129–137. doi: 10.1038/leu.2013.239.
78. Burnett A.K., Russell N.H., Hills R.K., Hunter A.E.,
Kjeldsen L., Yin J., Gibson B.E., Wheatley K., Milligan D.
Optimization of chemotherapy for younger patients with acute
myeloid leukemia: Results of the medical research council
AML15 trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2013;31:3360–3368. doi:
Scholar]
79. Schiffer C. Optimal dose and schedule of consolidation in
AML: Is there a standard? Best Pract. Res. Clin. Haematol.
2014;27:259–264. doi: 10.1016/j.beha.2014.10.007. [PubMed]
80. Appelbaum F.R. The current status of hematopoietic cell
transplantation. Annu. Rev. Med. 2003;54:491–512. doi:
10.1146/annurev.med.54.101601.152456. [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
81. Popat U., de Lima M.J., Saliba R.M., Anderlini P.,
Andersson B.S., Alousi A.M., Hosing C., Nieto Y., Parmar S.,
Khouri I.F., et al. Long-term outcome of reduced-intensity
allogeneic hematopoietic SCT in patients with AML in CR.
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2012;47:212–216. doi:

10.1038/bmt.2011.61. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
82. Sorror M.L., Maris M.B., Storb R., Baron F., Sandmaier
B.M., Maloney D.G., Storer B. Hematopoietic cell
transplantation (HCT)-specific comorbidity index: A new tool
for risk assessment before allogeneic HCT. Blood.
2005;106:2912–2919. doi: 10.1182/blood-2005-05-2004. [PMC
free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
83. Devine S.M., Owzar K., Blum W., Mulkey F., Stone R.M.,
Hsu J.W., Champlin R.E., Chen Y.B., Vij R., Slack J., et al.
Phase II Study of Allogeneic Transplantation for Older Patients
With Acute Myeloid Leukemia in First Complete Remission
Using a Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Regimen: Results From
Cancer and Leukemia Group B 100103 (Alliance for Clinical
Trials in Oncology)/Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trial
Network 0502. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015;33:4167–4175. [PMC free
article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
84. Breems D.A., Van Putten W.L., Huijgens P.C.,
Ossenkoppele G.J., Verhoef G.E., Verdonck L.F., Vellenga E.,
De Greef G.E., Jacky E., Van der Lelie J., et al. Prognostic
index for adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia in first
relapse. J. Clin. Oncol. 2005;23:1969–1978. doi:
Scholar]
85. Soignet S.L., Maslak P., Wang Z.G., Jhanwar S., Calleja E.,
Dardashti L.J., Corso D., DeBlasio A., Gabrilove J., Scheinberg
D.A., et al. Complete remission after treatment of acute
promyelocytic leukemia with arsenic trioxide. N. Engl. J. Med.
1998;339:1341–1348. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199811053391901.
86. Sudhindra A., Smith C.C. FLT3 inhibitors in AML: Are we
there yet? Curr. Hematol. Malig. Rep. 2014;9:174–185. doi:
10.1007/s11899-014-0203-8. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar]
87. Levis M., Ravandi F., Wang E.S., Baer M.R., Perl A.,
Coutre S., Erba H., Stuart R.K., Baccarani M., Cripe L.D., et al.

Results from a randomized trial of salvage chemotherapy
followed by lestaurtinib for patients with FLT3 mutant AML in
first relapse. Blood. 2011;117:3294–3301. doi: 10.1182/blood-
2010-08-301796. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
88. Stone R.M., DeAngelo D.J., Klimek V., Galinsky I., Estey
E., Nimer S.D., Grandin W., Lebwohl D., Wang Y., Cohen P., et
al. Patients with acute myeloid leukemia and an activating
mutation in FLT3 respond to a small-molecule FLT3 tyrosine
kinase inhibitor, PKC412. Blood. 2005;105:54–60. doi:
Scholar]
89. Smith B.D., Levis M., Beran M., Giles F., Kantarjian H.,
Berg K., Murphy K.M., Dauses T., Allebach J., Small D. Single-
agent cep-701, a novel flt3 inhibitor, shows biologic and
clinical activity in patients with relapsed or refractory acute
myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2004;103:3669–3676. doi:
Scholar]
90. Pratz K.W., Cortes J., Roboz G.J., Rao N., Arowojolu O.,
Stine A., Shiotsu Y., Shudo A., Akinaga S., Small D., et al. A
pharmacodynamic study of the FLT3 inhibitor KW-2449 yields
insight into the basis for clinical response. Blood.
2009;113:3938–3946. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-09-177030.
91. Serve H., Krug U., Wagner R., Sauerland M.C., Heinecke
A., Brunnberg U., Schaich M., Ottmann O., Duyster J., Wandt
H., et al. Sorafenib in combination with intensive chemotherapy
in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia: Results from a
randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J. Clin. Oncol.
2013;31:3110–3118. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.46.4990. [PubMed]
92. Ravandi F., Alattar M.L., Grunwald M.R., Rudek M.A.,
Rajkhowa T., Richie M.A., Pierce S., Daver N., Garcia-Manero
G., Faderl S., et al. Phase 2 study of azacytidine plus sorafenib
in patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT-3 internal

tandem duplication mutation. Blood. 2013;121:4655–4662. doi:
93. Fiedler W., Kayser S., Kebenko M., Krauter J., Salih H.R.,
Götze K., Späth D., Göhring G., Teleanu V., Döhner K., et al.
Sunitinib and intensive chemotherapy in patients with acute
myeloid leukemia and activating flt3 mutations: Results of the
amlsg 10-07 study (clinicaltrials.Gov no. Nct00783653);
Procedings of the 56th ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition;
Atlanta, GA, USA. 8–11 December 2012. [Google Scholar]
94. Stone R.M., Mandrekar S., Sanford B.L., Geyer S.,
Bloomfield C.D., Dohner K., Thiede C., Marcucci G., Lo-CoCo
F., Klisovic R.B., et al. The multi-kinase inhibitor midostaurin
(M) prolongs survival compared with placebo (P) in
combination with daunorubicin (D)/cytarabine (C) induction
(ind), high-dose c consolidation (consol), and as maintenance
(maint) therapy in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia
(AML) patients (pts) age 18–60 with FLT3 mutations (muts):
An international prospective randomized (rand) p-controlled
double-blind trial (CALGB 10603/RATIFY [Alliance]);
Proceedings of the American Society of Hematology Annual
Meeting; Orlando, FL, USA. 5–8 December 2015. [Google
Scholar]
95. Smith C.C., Wang Q., Chin C.S., Salerno S., Damon L.E.,
Levis M.J., Perl A.E., Travers K.J., Wang S., Hunt J.P., et al.
Validation of ITD mutations in FLT3 as a therapeutic target in
human acute myeloid leukemia. Nature. 2012;485:260–263. doi:
10.1038/nature11016. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar]
96. Lee H.K., Kim H.W., Lee I.Y., Lee J., Lee J., Jung D.S.,
Lee S.Y., Park S.H., Hwang H., Choi J.S., et al. G-749, a novel
FLT3 kinase inhibitor, can overcome drug resistance for the
treatment of acute myeloid leukemia. Blood. 2014;123:2209–
2219. doi: 10.1182/blood-2013-04-493916. [PMC free article]
97. Altman J.K., Perl A.E., Cortes J.E., Levis M.J., Smith C.S.,

Litzow M.R., Baer M.R., Claxton D.F., Erba H.P., Gill S.C., et
al. Antileukemic Activity and Tolerability of ASP2215 80mg
and Greater in FLT3 Mutation-Positive Subjects with Relapsed
or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results from a Phase
1/2, Open-Label, Dose-Escalation/Dose-Response Study;
Proceedings of the American Society of Hematology Annual
Meeting; Orlando, FL, USA. 5–8 December 2015. [Google
Scholar]
98. Stein E.M., Altman J.K., Collins R., DeAngelo D.J., Fathi
A.T., Flinn I., Frankel A., Levine R.L., Medeiros B.C., Patel
M., et al. AG-221, an Oral, Selective, First-in-Class, Potent
Inhibitor of the IDH2 Mutant Metabolic Enzyme, Induces
Durable Remissions in a Phase I Study in Patients with IDH2
Mutation Positive Advanced Hematologic Malignancies;
Procedings of 56th ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition; San
Francisco, CA, USA. 6–9 December 2014; p. 115. [Google
Scholar]
99. Hansen E., Quivoron C., Straley K., Lemieux R.M.,
Popovici-Muller J., Sadrzadeh H., Fathi A.T., Gliser C., David
M., Saada V., et al. AG-120, an Oral, Selective, First-in-Class,
Potent Inhibitor of Mutant IDH1, Reduces Intracellular 2HG
and Induces Cellular Differentiation in TF-1 R132H Cells and
Primary Human IDH1 Mutant AML Patient Samples Treated Ex
Vivo; Procedings of 56th ASH Annual Meeting and Exposition;
San Francisco, CA, USA. 6–9 December 2014; p. 3734. [Google
Scholar]
100. Fukuda M., Asano S., Nakamura T., Adachi M., Yoshida
M., Yanagida M., Nishida E. CRM1 is responsible for
intracellular transport mediated by the nuclear export signal.
Nature. 1997;390:308–311. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
101. Kojima K., Kornblau S.M., Ruvolo V., Dilip A., Duvvuri
S., Davis R.E., Zhang M., Wang Z., Coombes K.R., Zhang N.,
et al. Prognostic impact and targeting of CRM1 in acute

102. Turner J.G., Sullivan D.M. CRM1-mediated nuclear export
of proteins and drug resistance in cancer. Curr. Med. Chem.
2008;15:2648–2655. doi: 10.2174/092986708786242859.
103. Ranganathan P., Yu X., Na C., Santhanam R., Shacham S.,
Kauffman M., Walker A., Klisovic R., Blum W., Caligiuri M.,
et al. Preclinical activity of a novel CRM1 inhibitor in acute
104. Etchin J., Sun Q., Kentsis A., Farmer A., Zhang Z.C.,
Sanda T., Mansour M.R., Barcelo C., McCauley D., Kauffman
M., et al. Antileukemic activity of nuclear export inhibitors that
spare normal hematopoietic cells. Leukemia. 2013;27:66–74.
doi: 10.1038/leu.2012.219. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
105. Castaigne S., Pautas C., Terré C., Raffoux E., Bordessoule
D., Bastie J.-N., Legrand O., Thomas X., Turlure P., Reman O.,
et al. Effect of gemtuzumab ozogamicin on survival of adult
patients with de-novo acute myeloid leukaemia (ALFA-0701): A
randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet. 2012;379:1508–
1516. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60485-1. [PubMed]
106. Gasiorowski R.E., Clark G.J., Bradstock K., Hart D.N.J.
Antibody therapy for acute myeloid leukaemia. Br. J. Haematol.
2014;164:481–495. doi: 10.1111/bjh.12691. [PubMed]
107. Gill S., Tasian S.K., Ruella M., Shestova O., Li Y., Porter
D.L., Carroll M., Danet-Desnoyers G., Scholler J., Grupp S.A.,
et al. Preclinical targeting of human acute myeloid leukemia
and myeloablation using chimeric antigen receptor-modified T
cells. Blood. 2014;123:2343–2354. doi: 10.1182/blood-2013-09-
Scholar]
Articles from Journal of Clinical Medicine are provided here

courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing
Research Problems and objectives
Ruth Ivy
Professor Bolles
HCM 402
July 27, 2019
Research Problem
A problem statement in research is a statement that describes a
current issue that needs to be addressed.
Problem statement provides the base for the research and gives
the questions to be answered by the study.
Steps to writing a research problem
Choosing an interesting topic
Doing preliminary research on the topic
Identify the target audience
Begin asking some questions
Evaluate the questions
Do the research
Research objectives
Research objectives are the guidelines on what we want to
achieve in a research.
The research objectives should be clearly stated.
In writing objectives:
You should focus on the study
You should identify the variables to be measured to be
measured
Give steps to be followed
Give the limits of your research
In writing objectives, measurable verbs should be used; for
example, create, understand, and analyze.

Research Question
A research question is a set of inquiry of what needs to be
answered in research.
Formulating a research question is the initial step in a research
project.
There are three types of research questions; descriptive,
observational-relational and casual.
To formulate a research question;
you should understand your problem.
Then ask yourself what you need to answer.
Cont..
A research question should be feasible, ethical, relevant, and
very interesting.
A question written appropriately should therefore be concise
and clear.
It should carry the purpose, the variables, and the population of
the research in it.
Research Approach
The approach to your research depends on the type of data
collected.
Research approach entails the procedures to be followed in
collecting, analyzing, and presenting data.
Depending on the type of data, research approaches are divided
into three methods;
Deductive approach
Inductive approach
Abductive approach
Reference

Kumar, R. (2019). Research methodology: A step-by-step guide
for beginners. Sage Publications Limited.
Patten, M. L. (2016). Questionnaire research: A practical guide.
Routledge.
Assignment 4: Health Services Research Proposal Synopsis
This assignment details your Health Services Research Proposal
Synopsis. ALL proposals for
any type of scholarly work must cover the 5 bold points in the
key elements below:
Section/Chapter1 contains:
1. Background and need for the work
2. Problem statement
3. Scholarly Objective, Research question (and hypotheses if
needed)
Section/Chapter 2 contains
4. Study-relevant information obtained from a review of the
literature
Section/Chapter 3 contains
5. Approach (method/design) and some information on 6-13
below
a. Study design used

b. Sample, population, participants
c. Data source, data collection instruments and procedures
d. Definitions of study variables or study dimensions of interest
e. Data analysis procedures or procedures for organizing
findings of
qualitative studies
f. Limitations
g. Results, expected findings
h. Potential significance of findings, expected conclusions,
importance of
research
In 5-6 pages using APA format, write a Research Proposal
Synopsis. Utilizing your work from
assignments 2 and 3, write a proposal synopsis which includes
all of the bold elements above and
conclude your proposal with a brief paragraph (3-4 sentences)
describing what you learned from
this assignment. Students will give a presentation on their
proposals.
When structuring your Methods section of the Research
Proposal Synopsis, use part of the
formal outline of a methods section as listed below. The section
headings for
exploratory/descriptive, case studies, and best practices papers
are in parentheses when they
differ from headings used in hypothesis testing studies.

METHODS
Study Objective(s)
Hypotheses (or Research Questions)
Approach or Study Design
Data Sources (or Population)
Specification of Variables (or Specification of Questions
[Opinions or Insights] to be
Elicited)
Data Collection or Data Set Construction (for archival data sets)
Data Analysis
In addition to the 5-6 pages, include a bibliography and
separately upload a Word document
containing all 10 of the required annotated bibliographies.
As a guide to writing your proposal synopsis, go through the
process of answering the questions
posed below. DO NOT INCLUDE THESE IN YOUR
ASSIGNMENT, this is just a process to
assist you. Use the text to help you through this process. Make
notes or write drafts as you
proceed.

1. Restate or revise/clarify the project question you identified in
Assignment 2. Based on
what you have learned, using your Problem Description and
your Literature Review,
what objective (or research questions) do you NOW want your
study to meet? (It may
have changed after your initial research).
2. What type of scholarly inquiry is your study (they each have
different formats for
writing)?
a. Is this a project aimed at informing professional practice by
integrating what is
known into a “best practices” or “new insights” document?
b. Is it an organizational case study or a consulting report?
c. Is this a prospective study where you collect qualitative data?
d. Is this a survey using a previously validated instrument?
e. Are you developing and pilot testing a survey instrument?
f. Are you analyzing archival data to describe a problem or
issues in current
practice?
g. Is your study and analysis of archival (previously collected)
data that tests a
hypotheses using inferential statistics?
h. Will you collect data prospectively and use these data to test
a hypothesis?
3. Where or from whom and how can you get the data or
information you need?
4. How will you collect those data or the information of
interest?
5. How will you measure/record the evidence?

6. Which factors may affect your findings? Can you
measure/and or control many of these
irrelevant factors?
7. For quantitative evidence, what statistical approaches will
you use to analyze your data?
For qualitative approaches, how will you organize your
responses?
8. What do you expect to find? How will you report these
findings?
Helpful Suggestion: Let your brain and notes rest for at least 24
hours, and preferably 48 hours.
Re-read your notes from the above process and start writing a 5-
6 page “Proposal Synopsis”
paper from scratch, not by copying pieces of your notes. This
will make for a more flowing and
cohesive paper.

A sample of an annotated bibliography entry for HCM402, using the .docx

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie A sample of an annotated bibliography entry for HCM402, using the .docx

Ähnlich wie A sample of an annotated bibliography entry for HCM402, using the .docx (16)

Mehr von blondellchancy

Mehr von blondellchancy (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

A sample of an annotated bibliography entry for HCM402, using the .docx